Saturday, March 15, 2014

There is a saying; Be careful of who you lie with, because you just
might get bitten in the ass. Unless, of course, ass bites are one of
your most cherished fetishes.

Remember the name "Judith
Reisman"? She had recently
joined forces with sister fundie Shelley Lubben in a You Tube video taped at a recent porn convention,
where Shelley was actively trolling for new fresh recruits to scam for
her Pink Cross faux ministry or ex-porn starlets.

Before then, "Dr."
Reisman was well acclaimed as a crackpot right-wing "scholar" who
focused her antiporn activism on the calamitous impact of porn on the
synapses of its user through "erotoxins", as well as her usual crackpot
opposition to any form of sexual activity not approvable to her
Christian fundamentalist sensibiities.

You may also remember "Dr." Reisman from her legacy of going from being a script writer for the old-school children's TV show Captain Kangaroo
(an eye-roller of its own, considering that Mr. Captain himself, Bob
Keeshan, was a openly activist liberal) to becoming an antiporn
"feminist" activist who blamed adult sexual speech for causing child
sexual abuse, pedophilia, rape, and other degradations to women and
children. In an essay that was posted to the 1970's antirape
radicalfeminist anthem, Take Back The Night, she maligned the
three founders of print porn media -- Playboy's Hugh Hefner, Penthouse's
Bob Guccione, and HUSTLER's Larry Flynt, in no particular order, as
"Hitler, Stalin, and Goebbels". She then parlayed that pub into an
appearance giving testimony to the 1980's Meese Commission On
Pornography, where she got to pontificate on the cosmic danger of
Playboy pushing child porn to impressionable youth through
its...cartoons.

So...how does this connect with Gail Dines?? Well,
Reisman's "scholarship" on the negative impacts of porn has been used,
reused, and used over and over again by Dines and her associates over at
Stop Porn Culture to make their case for censorship of all sexually
explicit material. Also, Shelley Lubben has often used Reisman as a
go-to source for some of most classic rantage about the destructiveness
of porn on those who perform it.

Even better than that, Dines and
SPC have been more frequently using Reisman's "scholarship" as a means
to unite the antiporn "feminist" and traditionalist Religious Right
"obscenity" movements with the anti-sex work "abolitionists" in
connecting porn and prostitution/escorting/oncall sexual services/sexual
commerce as "sex trafficking".

Plus (and here's the kicker to all
this), Dines has been attempting to glam her way into the debate over
mandatory condoms in porn by positively citing the efforts of the AIDS
Healthcare Foundation to force performers to use condoms and other
"barrier methods" as a means of containing an alleged STI/HIV
"pandemic".

Never mind that the efforts of AHF come from a fundamentally
different paradigm of making money off condom sales....ahhhh, I mean,
protecting the jobs of crossover HIV+ performers who would be otherwise
prevented from performing in the "straight" porn industry due to the
current screening/testing regimen imposed by the Free Speech Coalition's
PASS protocols. And, never mind that AHF's core constituency happens to
be the very gay male community that has been truly wrecked by the HIV
pandemic, albeit there is vast opposition even there to what some feel
is AHF's hamfisted approach to selling condoms as "behavior
modification", as opposed to treatment or development of a vaccine to
cure HIV. To Gail Dines, anything that can be used to slam porn as
"corporate capitalist" mass rape and abuse of women is a good thing.

Except, with Judith Reisman, she may have bit off just a bit too much.

Michael Whiteacre of The Real Porn Wikileaks alerted me to an article
which ran today over at the very, very ultra right-wing site World Net
Daily, which most folk would much prefer to call "WingNut Daily" due to
its predisposition to the most bizarre conspiracy theories known to
mankind. You know...Birth certificates? Madrassas? Agenda 21/ACORN? "Obama is a Muslim Socialist"??

Anyways..the
article pretended itself to be an attack on the notion that condoms are
the most effective means for gay male folk to protect themselves
against STI's, including HIV/AIDS. It preferred the old tried-an-true
method of gays giving up their nasty, sinful, disgusting "buggery" and
coming home to Jesus Christ and the joys of heterosexual monogamy and
procreative marriage..or facing the full brunt of criminalization
through anti-sodomy laws. The article also called for good, God-fearing
families of people suffering from HIV, and/or the relatives of people
who actually succumbed to HIV/AIDS, to be able to file class action
suits against "pro-gay" organizations for lying about the true nature of
condoms failing to protect their users from contracting HIV.

Further,
the WND article claimed that anal "sex" (yes, the fright quotes are
included, because to the author of the piece, penises should never, ever
attempt to even touch the tender anal passages of any other person,
especially not another man) is not subject to the wonderful protection
of more Godly acts like "natural" vaginal sex, because the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) allegedly never approved the use of
condoms for anal penetration.

The author's evidence for this?? Citations from a "study" from a right-wing Hawaiian state senator
named Bob McDermott, attempting to oppose a sex education program in
that state that was used by a whopping 12 schools, which called for the
usage of condoms as a barrier protectant for PIV and anal penetration.
That study took note of the disclaimer that the CDC had not endorsed the
use of the original condoms for anal sex due to the risk of breakage
and the inflexibility of anal passages.

A single line quote from Rep.
McDermott condenses the point concisely:

Don't you just love how fundie rightwingers are so quick with cursing, and just as quick with masking it?

The payoff paragraph in this is whom the author recommends to be sued:

A
class action lawsuit by AIDS victims and their loved ones would rock
the world – a suit based on the fact that condom pushers have for years
dispensed false, deceptive claims about how the product protects – or
fails to protect – the health of sex participants. The reality is that
everyday condoms are manufactured and approved for natural, vaginal sex,
not anal “sex” – they are not effectively designed to protect from
disease those people who engage in sodomy.

Such
a lawsuit should target the AIDS Heathcare Foundation, Planned
Parenthood and a myriad of teachers and school systems, too many to
count, that have taught that anal “sex” (traditionally termed “sodomy”
or “buggery” under British-based legal codes) as not so different than
natural coitus.

A right-wing antigay organization targeting
AHF for representing HIV+ gay folk isn't really news, of course. Until
you find out that the author of that piece happens to be....
(screenshot, please)

[click on thumb to link to article]

Yup....you
read right....THAT Judith Reisman. Gail Dines' go-to source for
"feminist" analysis against porn. The artist formerly known as "Judith
Bat-Ada" who was so trusted by radfems that she scored a essay in one of
their classic anthologies. The one connection between the whacked-out
Hard Right and the radfem antiporn "Left". THAT Judith Reisman.

And
now, the same Judith Reisman who is now attempting to ride the wave of
antiporn/anti-sexwork activism, and link it with the anti- "sex
trafficking" and "porn addiction" movements, and bring her old-school
historic antigay bigotry into the mix.

Gee...I wonder what Michael
Weinstein would be thinking once he reads this? Or, the
"radicallesbians" now totally committed to this "alliance"? Or, for that
matter, Professor Dines herself, since she constantly rails about her
movement being nicked falsely as palling around with reactionaries.
Or...is World Net Daily now simply her newest ally in the fight against
The Great Porn Capitalist Conspiracy, and any talk of a "progressive"
antiporn "feminist" movement merely just a ruse to cover up the usual
sex-hate against anything not linked to procreation or "mutual love"?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Support Cytherea's Recovery!!!

About This Blog

Why yes, this blog is dedicated to pro-porn activism! With the belief that pornography falls under the auspices free speech and expression, and is legitimate entertainment for consenting adults, if made for and by consenting adults. One, as a consenting adult, has the right to make and view pornography as they choose.